Electrical Blog
When you can’t dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit. Idiot Harry Reid maintains that paying income tax is voluntary in the US. Harry Reid is the Majority Leader in the US Senate. He’s obviously not very bright. But then again… he is a politician. Interviewer Jan Helfeld does a great job of trying to nail him down but… well, you’ll see. See more bottom Line Interviews by Jan Helfeld at janhelfeld.com
Tags: clinton, democrat, election, Harry, helfeld, jan, janhelfeld.com, Leader, Majority, obama, Reid, Senate, Senator, taxation, U.S., voluntary, vote
Posted in Taxes · November 8th, 2009 · Comments (25)
November 5th, 2009 at 9:36 pm
So IRC 6001 (the law)is different than IRC 6001 and IRC 6001 does not apply to the foreign branch ect..But IRC 6001 does apply to foreign branch.O.K. its as clear as my stupidity. wow that clears it all up.
November 5th, 2009 at 9:45 pm
As for the vile and corrupt $y$tem.You know that is my opinion of how the money $y$tem is conTROLLed.Trillions of our dollars used for what ?And they want more with climate treaty,health care ect..
November 6th, 2009 at 3:54 pm
WOW!!! You’re still blind!!
I said that what you posted (IRM 6001) is not the same as the law (IRC 6001).
November 6th, 2009 at 3:55 pm
“As for the vile and corrupt $y$tem.”
That is not what the debate is about. the debate is about the income tax law, not what happens to the money after it is collected.
November 6th, 2009 at 7:42 pm
Harry Reid is a voluntary douchebag
November 6th, 2009 at 8:40 pm
You know i dont take insults very well (Blind) Read it it says IRC 6001Applies to a foreign branch of a U.S. corp. ect…Not IRM it isays IRC Be carfull who you call blind sir.
November 6th, 2009 at 8:48 pm
The debate is whatever anybody wants it to be.
November 6th, 2009 at 8:51 pm
It reads IRC not m IRC 6001 applies to a foreign branch of a US corp.ect….
November 6th, 2009 at 9:56 pm
My first post disappeared try it again. It reads IRC not M IRC6001 applies to a foreign branch of a US corp. ect….Be carefull who you call blind, Sir.
November 7th, 2009 at 5:47 am
A prime example of the stupidness that’s running our country right now… We have the worst accumilation of idiots… ever… in power in Washington… It is a world record even amoung all third world countries..
November 7th, 2009 at 6:43 am
Don’t worry,,we Nevadans are gonna vote this idiot out in ‘10. I see pinky..where’s the brain?
November 7th, 2009 at 7:47 am
“i dont take insults very well”
TBSS.
Section 6001 applies to much more than what you think, try reading it sometime.
frwebgate3[dot]access[dot]gpo[dot]gov/cgi-bin/TEXTgate.cgi?WAISdocID=5807308066+24+1+0&WAISaction=retrieve
November 7th, 2009 at 3:45 pm
That link stops after WAISdocID=5 My post are limited to few words.
November 7th, 2009 at 4:31 pm
Because no direct tax on private earnings exists in this country, our tax system is voluntary. But the part that is voluntary is whether or not you want to engage in excise taxable activities, and thus create liability that would not otherwise exist. However, if you choose to engage in an excise taxable activity, the tax is not voluntary for you any longer – you volunteered and you must pay the tax.
November 7th, 2009 at 4:31 pm
Go to gpo access search for “Title 26 section 6001″ and #42 should be the one to look at.
November 7th, 2009 at 4:49 pm
“engage in excise taxable activities”
Nope, you just have to have income as defined in Title 26. the tax itself is in no way ‘voluntary’.
November 7th, 2009 at 5:01 pm
Where does 6001 give the authority to the IRS to look at MY private records ?I think that was my question ?
November 7th, 2009 at 5:06 pm
Remember your dealing with someone who is mentally challenged and my image concept and skills are limited.But my desire to learn is still there.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:03 pm
“The Treasury Department cannot, by interpretive regulations, make income out of that which is not income within the meaning of the revenue acts of Congress, nor can Congress, without apportionment, tax as income that which is not income within the meaning of the 16th Amendment.”
Helvering v. Edison Bros. Stores, 133 F.2D 575
November 7th, 2009 at 6:12 pm
Flora v U.S., 362 US 145 (1959), never overruled: “… the government can collect the tax from a
district court suitor by exercising it’s power of distraint… but we cannot believe that compelling resort to
this extraordinary procedure is either wise or in accord with congressional intent.
November 7th, 2009 at 9:36 pm
“6001 give the authority to the IRS”
“Pursuant to Section 7805(a) of the Code, the Commissioner has broad authority to prescribe all NEEDFUL rules and regulations for the enforcement of [the Code], including all rules and regulations as may be NECESSARY by reason of any alteration of law in relation to internal revenue.”
Lovetts Estate v. United States, 621 F.2d 1130, 1135 (Ct. Cl. 1980)
November 7th, 2009 at 9:47 pm
…§ 61(a) of the Code defines gross income as all income from whatever source derived, including . . . compensation for services. In sum, the sixteenth amendment authorizes the imposition of a tax upon income without apportionment among the states, and under the statute, the term income includes the compensation a taxpayer receives in return for services rendered. Taxpayers’ argument that wages received for services are not taxable as income is clearly frivolous.
Funk v. Commissioner
November 7th, 2009 at 9:57 pm
Read the next line:
“…In sum, if we were to accept petitioner’s argument, we would sacrifice the harmony of our carefully structured twentieth century system of tax litigation, and all that would be achieved would be a supposed harmony of § 1346(a)(1) with what might have been the nineteenth century law had the issue ever been raised.
Reargument has but fortified our view that § 1346(a)(1), correctly construed, requires full payment of the assessment…”
November 7th, 2009 at 10:32 pm
This video makes me want to blow a cork. The federal government spends less than 1% of welfare and people make this sound onerous. Unbridled selfishness did not make this country great.
November 7th, 2009 at 10:44 pm
Did you know that as the years went by and the Gov spent more on welfare private charities went down?
The gov. needs to get out of the welfare business and turn it back to private charities.